Massive study concludes: 'Global warming is real'

[babsbunny]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/21/berkeley_earth_surface_temperature_study/

Climate skeptics dealt 'clear and rigorous' blow

By Rik Myslewski in San Francisco • Get more from this author

Posted in Environment, 21st October 2011 21:43 GMT

Free whitepaper – Fluid data architecture pays off for CMA

A massively thorough study – funded in part by a pair of US oil billionaire who are opponents of climate-disruption remediation – has come to the conclusion that the earth is, indeed, warming.

In fact, it's warming just as much as more-limited studies conducted by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA, and the UK's Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Change said it was: about 1°C since 1950.

[Amonester]

1. (Polar bear survival): Judge upholds ban on American hunters

Judge upholds ban on American hunters bringing back polar bear trophies
The Canadian Press, Tuesday, October 18, 2011 11:8 AM

WASHINGTON - A U.S. court has upheld a ban on American sport hunters returning home with polar bear trophies from Canada.

In a decision released Monday, the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was within its mandate to forbid the import of polar bear parts.

Although the American Marine Mammals Protection Act does allow importing bear trophies if they were legally obtained, the Fish and Wildlife Service maintained that loophole was rendered invalid because climate change is threatening the species' survival.

Source: http://www.globalnews.ca/canada/judge+upholds+ban+on+american+hunters+bringing+back+polar+bear+trophies/6442503146/story.html

[gratuitous]

2. The deniers have already moved on

The evidence is just too clear to be denied, they've moved on to their assertion that climate change isn't caused by anything humans are doing, so there's no need for us to change a thing. We can continue our overconsumptive, wasteful habits free and clear of any environmental consequences. Others have staked out a slightly different position, that even if there is a human factor involved in climate change, it won't do any good to modify our behavior, so let the good times (cough, hack) roll!

There was a delightful letter to the editor in our local paper the other day. A woman was talking about her young daughter watching the Warner Bros. cartoon "What's Opera, Doc." Elmer Fudd is an opera character trying to get Bugs Bunny, and he brews a cauldron of stuff to bring down bad weather and stuff on Bugs. He calls for snow, rain, wind and hail, then he calls for "SMOG"! The little girl said, "What's smog, Mommy?" The woman said she was quite happy with the regulation of the environment, and Republicans who wanted to return to the days of toxic air and water could shove it.

[Ohio Joe]

3. The deniers do not care

The facts have been clear for a while now but the repugs/teabaggers believe what big business wants them to believe rather then the facts.

"Man's unfailing capacity to believe what he prefers to be true rather than what the evidence shows to be likely and possible has always astounded me. We long for a caring Universe which will save us from our childish mistakes, and in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary we will pin all our hopes on the slimmest of doubts. God has not been proven not to exist, therefore he must exist."

Academician Prokhor Zakharov - Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

[Zanzoobar]

4. That's not the issue, is it?

The 'debate' is over the cause.

[kestrel91316]

5. Wrong. The deniers have been claiming for years that GW isn't happening.

Now, like religious nuts are wont to do, they are simply moving the goalposts and saying man has nothing to do with it. They are even MORE wrong about this, of course. CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuels is not somehow magically exempt from the laws of physics and specifically the greenhouse effect.

There IS no debate over the fact of AGW except by those who claim the bible says God wouldn't send anymore floods and therefore he won't let the ice melt and flood the coasts. They may try to hide their religious reasons for disbelieving in GW/AGW, but when you dig deep enough that's invariably what you find.

A "debate" between scientific experts and biblical literalists in no debate whatsoever.

[Zanzoobar]

6. Do you expect to be taken seriously?

Scientific experts and biblical literalists?

It's apparent you're angry about religion, but I think you might find the debate exists outside it altogether.

Apparently you are convinced that the pope or some pentecostal cabal is influencing federal policy. The jews can't be far behind.

[immoderate]

8. Actually all the deniers work on some aspect of "faith," god or not.

Besides the religious, the deniers I encounter are libertarian types who see markets, the planet, the environment, and resources as unlimited. The "invisible hand" keeps everything in line, or something. It's not much different than talking to a fundy, (or a new ager who's accusing you of "linear thinking.")

--imm

[Zanzoobar]

10. Are you a climatologist?

I'm not. I am forced to take what I'm told on faith. I don't have the instruments or the expertise. Most of us don't. The problem with climate science is that it has become politicized. The vehemence on both sides is off the scale. I distrust everyone regarding this issue.

[immoderate]

11. Do you believe in atoms? Have you ever seen one?

Are things like carbon and oxygen articles of faith? How about relativity?

Are the greenhouse properties of CO2 also the product of someone's imagination? How do you know that a thermometer is telling you something about average molecular velocity?

Do you distrust evolutionists because they are zealous?

--imm

[provis99]

7. And water is wet! And sunshine is bright! And the sky is up!

[immoderate]

9. And they all have their deniers, I'm sure...

This one is really the edge of reality -- ours or theirs? :shrug: Evolution or creation? How ya gonna go?

--imm